Whose Agenda?

Boy Scouts

You have probably heard of how the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) recently changed its policy toward homosexuality.  No longer will a scout be denied membership “on the basis of sexual orientation or preference alone.” This was seen as a victory for gay-rights advocates and activists across the country, especially those who are open about their sexual preferences and activity.

However, as reported in the New York Times, this will most likely NOT be the last policy change. The very ones who led the Scouts to make this change want to see more changes made, and this is only the tip of the iceberg…

The policy change, effective January 2014, is unlikely to bring peace to the Boy Scouts as they struggle to keep a foothold in a swirling cultural landscape, with renewed lobbying and debate already starting …The Scouts did not consider the even more divisive question of whether to allow openly gay adults and leaders. This drew criticism from advocates for gay rights, who called the decision a breakthrough but vowed to continue pressing the Scouts to allow gay members of all ages.

It seems to me that the decision made by the Boy Scouts was not one made simply for the good of the boys, but as a result of political, social, and financial pressure…

The top national leaders of the Boy Scouts, who pledge fealty to God and country, had urged the change in the face of vehement opposition from conservative parents and volunteers, some of whom said they would quit the organization. But the vote put the Scouts more in line with the swift rise in public acceptance of homosexuality, especially among younger parents who are essential to the future of an institution that has been losing members for decades. (New York Times)

As to the Lord

There will always be those who want to pressure us into doing things, but we must keep in mind that when all is said and done, politics, societal changes, membership roles, and public opinion are not God. Believers must determine who they want to please more: God, or man.

The Apostle Paul taught the church at Colossae a truth that is very applicable to today. He said that “whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men; knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: for ye serve the Lord Christ” (Col. 3:23-24).

By all accounts, against years of precedent, the BSA changed its policy to reflect a need to please men. By doing so it has voluntarily subjected itself to future attacks which will completely undermine the moral foundation on which the organization was built. “Fealty to God” has been exchanged for the fear of man.


Filed under America, Culture Wars, current events, politics, Uncategorized

33 responses to “Whose Agenda?

  1. The BSA are in a tough spot, no doubt. They’ve been trying to walk the fine line of pleasing everyone for years and it just isn’t working. Because a policy of pure appeasement rarely does.

    But, from a pure tactical standpoint, their latest moves are their best bet to stick around for awhile longer. This “outrage” is really just a narrow collection of shrill talking heads that won’t ultimately affect the outcome of the BSA. That fact is that public sentiment is indeed trending towards more inclusiveness and less

    They do, however, need to clarify their position on homosexual BSA leaders. They’re presenting a glaring inconsistency for their failure to do so.

    With that said, I really cannot fathom the ridiculous opposition to allowing homosexual leaders. It’s not like they’re going to spend scout meetings talking about homosexuality. And it isn’t like homosexuals are sexual predators. This whole “outrage” seems predictably and firmly rooted in good old fashioned ignorance.

    If those who are outraged want to be morally consistent, they should advocate that only the wholly blameless should be allowed to be BSA leaders.

    Or they should cast the first stone.

    • I would first like to say, Andrew, that I appreciate you taking the time to comment. Unlike many who would disagree with me on certain issues, you are 98.76% respectful. For that I am thankful, even when I do think you are on the side of evil and, as Ed Grimley (Martin Short) used to say, “doomed as doomed can be.” Now, with all those formalities out of the way, I will move on.

      I would not characterize the 40 percent of the BSA delegates who voted against this measure as a “narrow collection of shrill talking heads.”

      The fact that public sentiment is moving in the direction of approving homosexuality proves nothing more than people don’t care what other people do as long as it doesn’t disturb their little world. Or it could just mean that sexual perversion is so rampant that giving in is the only option people think they have. OR, it is THEY who could be the ignorant ones.

      The old fashioned ignorance part is truly offensive, by the way, and smacks of belittling the opposition. I am not ignorant. I am completely aware of what is going on, it’s just that I have strong beliefs and reasons to consider certain activities immoral.

      “Ridiculous opposition to allowing homosexual leaders.” That really, really gets me. If it is sooooo ridiculous, then is it appropriate for males to be girl scout leaders? I’m sure nothing would be worrisome about a guy in the woods with a bunch of teenage girls. Naaah.

      And when you use that “morally consistent” accusation, you do it in the context of a biblical story which you inappropriately apply due to a mischaracterization of what happened with Jesus and the woman caught in sin. You are falling back on the old out-of-context argument of “thou shalt not judge.” The outraged are not calling for moral perfection – that is a straw man argument wrapped in shiny paper! The outrage is over much more than that. No one is perfect, and that is not the issue.

      • “Ridiculous opposition to allowing homosexual leaders.” That really, really gets me.”

        I guess my questions is…why? Is there a fear that a homosexual troop leader would try to take advantage of little boys? Is there a fear that the gay leaders will just spend the whole troop meeting talking about how awesome homosexuality is, and start churning out new homosexuals in the process?

        What is the fear?

        And I don’t see any problem whatsoever with a man leading a troop of Girl Scouts. First of all, it would be a matter of basic professionalism to include other adults on a “trip in the woods.” Second, a man could offer a man’s perspective that could be really valuable to young girls. So, I am not sure what the problem is with that scenario either.

      • Well…I guess your trust of human nature is either naive or beyond that of most parents.

      • You’re not answering the question.

        What is the threat posed by a homosexual troop leader that is NOT posed by a heterosexual troop leader?

      • Dude, you are (how do I say this politely?) NAIVE!

      • Then educate me. What am I missing?

        If the answer is so clear and I am, evidently, so naive…

        What is the threat posed to the scouts by a homosexual troop leader that is NOT posed by a heterosexual troop leader?

      • What is the threat of putting a lone male into a sensitive situation with girls?

      • No.

        What is the threat of a homosexual troop leader to his troop. Versus a heterosexual troop leader to his.

      • And in case you were really asking that question…

        Why is the situation “sensitive?”

        See above. I mentioned that it’s a basic act of professionalism to have multiple chaperones on a trip into the woods.

        Sheesh talk about the ultimate obscure red herring. Not only is a male leader with female troops nearly implausible, you’ve failed to answer my simple and direct question.

        That speaks volumes about your argument, or the lack thereof, in itself.

        So I will challenge you with what isn’t much of a challenge once more:

        What is the threat posed by a homosexual troop leader that is not posed by his heterosexual counterpart?

  2. “What is the fear?” he asks. This isn’t about “fear”. This is about an all out campaign for acceptance and approval of the gay life-style, and bullying or vilifying any one who disagrees.

    Those pushing the Boy Scouts to change their policies are crying “discrimination”. Yet they are asking organizations who previously supported the Boy Scouts financially to “discriminate” against the Scouts by withdrawing their support. Discrimination involves disagreement. Everyone who has moral convictions discriminates in some sense, even pro-gay advocates, who disagree with Biblical values, discriminate against those views. Yet the only group who gets labeled “Discriminatory” is the conservative group. This is just hypocritical, sophisticated name calling.

    • No, Steve, that’s not what we’re talking about. Thanks for trying though.

      Your analogy of discrimination is nice but inaccurate. This is pretty easy: we’re talking about discrimination in the sense of inclusion vs. exclusion.

      So what is the purpose of your stance of exclusion? Why shouldn’t a gay man be allowed to be a troop leader? After all, it isn’t like he’ll be wearing a sign indicating he’s a homosexual.

      What’s the fear, apprehension, discomfort, uneasiness, or malaise that causes you to assert a position on this?

      You’re free to believe and follow whatever you want. You’re not free to dictate how others conduct themselves. So, believe me, push that all you want.

      I’ll push back harder.

      • Now, this is more like the atheists I am accustomed to. Intimidation – a wonderful tool – is one of your weapons of choice. The funny thing is that you don’t usually use it on me, but you do to others who respond. Why is that?

  3. I have a really hard time believing you, Andrew, have ever had to deal with youth groups, youth leaders, codes of conduct, policies, etc. I wonder if you have ever had to do marriage counseling, divorce counseling, or counsel with a convicted sex offender. What is so hard to understand about all this? Is it not more likely that a gay guy would solicit a boy than a straight guy? Is there no place in your understanding for this? Is there no possibility that it would be more risky to put a man out in the woods with some girls, rather than a women with them? Come on, Andrew, where’s your common sense? Are you so pro-gay-agenda that you have lost all sense of propriety?

    But let’s not forget something that is very key to this discussion – your source of morality is different. You see nothing wrong with the pursuit of one’s sexual pleasures, just as long as the pursuee is willing. You don’t believe in right or wrong from any perspective other than a humanistic one. But even if that is true, can you not see that the human nature is one that cannot be totally trusted, especially in areas where there are known and verifiable weaknesses? That is precisely why more than one scout leader should go out with a group of kids. That is why we require more than one chaperon to go with our youth.

    Fear? Yes, I fear putting a professing, active homosexual in a leadership position over impressionable children of the same sex. I fear that as much as I would sending my daughters out into the woods with a married man I’ve known for years. We just don’t take those kind of chances – if we’re wise.

    But let’s also not forget that this is about much more than scout leaders; it’s about doing away with a moral standard which condemns a lifestyle that is a perversion. Gays want to be thought of as completely normal, just like grandma and grandpa of old – nothing different – just different body parts. But there is a difference, and this boy scout thing is just another place where those who want to feel justified in their perversions will attack.

    So, all that being said, you asked, “What is the threat posed by a homosexual troop leader that is not posed by his heterosexual counterpart?” My answer is: if you can’t see the problem, then you don’t want to see the problem.

    I feel sorry for the BSA and all they have been put through. I am sad that they caved. Unfortunately, there will be others who cave, also. In Canada and England it is illegal to publicly call homosexual behavior a sin. It won’t be long, at this rate, before pastors such as myself will face jail time. It’s already happened in other places, so why not here? But that’s ok. Maybe you could come visit me, Andrew.

    • Andrew

      I will respond soon. For now, I am drinkin some beers with friends. 🙂

    • Andrew

      In short, if your entire premise rests on the notion that sexual impropriety COULD happen with a homosexual troop leader as it could with a man among girl scouts… then your defense is pedantic and weak.

      Do you assume all people are sexual predators? I cannot fathom where this mentality comes from. Its cagey and sad.

      Yes, I grew up in youth groups and we always had members of the opposite sex around even well into my teenage years.

      And guess what, nothing happened. I suppose I should assume it would be different if a scary homo was around.

      Nevermind your complete and public failure to explain *why*

      • The “why” seemed pretty obvious. But the root of the whole issue is an attempt to force acceptance of a perversion. That is a big enough reason for me. But hey, as long as we keep this going we’ll keep adding to my views 😉

      • Now we’re getting somewhere!

        Nobody is forcing you to accept anything you don’t agree with.

        Take, for example, a troop leader who is engaged to be married but he’s also living with his future wife. This is sinful, no?

        Your acceptance of his post as troop leader doesn’t mean you’re accepting or supporting his behavior too…

        Christians just have a long, storied history of excluding the easy targets instead of applying the same standard of exclusion to all sinful lifestyles.

      • We were getting there a long time ago!

        Not forcing? Well, when you’re on the other side I guess it’s hard to see. So, let me just go ahead, for the sake of time, and finish this conversation for us.

        Andrew: “Show me where you’re being forced.”

        Anthony: “Example a, b, and c.”

        Andrew: “I don’t accept those examples as examples.”

      • Andrew

        Fortunately, your lack of “acceptance” doesn’t affect reality.

        The analogy I drew is cogent and concise. Any of your readers with an iota of common sense and rational thought can see that. You just want to dismiss is.

        Which is weak but that’s fine…I see it alllll the time.

      • Dude, are you serious? Yes, you are. If I had bought a puzzle for a duck and I got Winnie I’d get my money back. You’re using that to make your point and you want to talk about “reality”?

        If that is your perception of MY sense of reality, then I will share what the Apostle Paul thought of yours…

        (Romans 1:16-28)16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.
        17 For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith for faith,[fn] as it is written, “The righteous shall live by faith.”[fn]
        18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth.
        19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them.
        20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world,[fn] in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.
        21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened.
        22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools,
        23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.
        24 Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves,
        25 because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.
        26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature;
        27 and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.
        28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done.

        That is where I stand. I am not ashamed. And if my convictions one day put me in jail (which they probably will), then I’ll preach to a captive audience. And if it costs me my life, then so be it. That is my reality and I’m prepared to deal with it.

        I love you, Andrew, but there is a culture war going on. I’m sorry that we can’t see eye-to-eye on this.

  4. Rhonda Barnett

    Thank you for being a voice for so many of us Scout families Anthony. You are saying exactly what so many of us are feeling. You continue to stand tall with the knowledge what you say is truth and right before God. Blessings to you and your family.

  5. Chris Jordan

    Just wanted to take a moment to commend you for an excellent post. I totally agree with your statement: “It seems to me that the decision made by the Boy Scouts was not one made simply for the good of the boys, but as a result of political, social, and financial pressure.”
    One of the reasons why the boy scouts and girl guides have separate groups is to help prevent these young people from undue sexual temptation and pressure to do things that they are not yet ready for. Everyone knows that it is common sense that you don’t have boys and girls changing or showering together because of how it will stir up lustful feelings for one another.
    By allowing homosexual males to be a part of the boy scouts, they are basically doing the same thing. Now the heterosexual boys need to worry about the homosexual boys looking at them while they are changing, as well as the sexual advances that will surely and quickly follow.
    You said: “The Scouts did not consider the even more divisive question of whether to allow openly gay adults and leaders. This drew criticism from advocates for gay rights, who called the decision a breakthrough but vowed to continue pressing the Scouts to allow gay members of all ages.”
    Of course, this is the ultimate agenda that is being pushed here, homosexual men wanting to get into positions of power and authority over young boys so they can engage in their perverted sexual acts. And this is why smart parents are going to withdraw their sons membership from the boy scouts to protect them from sexual predators.
    So thank you for standing strong as voice for the truth, Anthony!

    • Are you KIDDING me!?

      You’re equating homosexuals and pedophiles? This is epitome of ultimate ignorance and bigotry.

      Anthony, you thanked this person. That’s pathetic. You ought to be ashamed of yourself and your fellow “Christians.” Jesus would be ashamed, if he was real.

      I’m done here. Like the whole thing. Arguing with reason and basic sanity has proved to be an exercise in futility. Enjoy wallowing in your permanent delusion.

    • Well, Chris, looks like you and I together became the final straw for Andrew.

      • Chris Jordan

        Anthony – verse 25 in your Romans Scripture in action: “they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator.” Its sad to see so many people willingly choose to turn away from the truth because they don’t want to hear it… *sigh* Oh well, keep preaching the truth, brother!

      • Dare I say “thanks”?

      • Chris Jordan

        Nope, you might get in trouble for that! 🙂

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.